In the April 23, 2016 New York Times Ken Ilguna makes a case for implementing “Right to Roam” laws in USA similar to those in England, Sweden, and other European nations.  Along the way he provides some useful comparative perspective on how different nations handle right to roam.  In the end he acknowledges that right to roam legislation is unlikely to happen in the USA for several reasons, including:

1. the “takings” clause of the Fifth Amendment declares that private property cannot “be taken for public use, without just compensation.”, and

2. The US once had “an expansive set of roaming rights and traditions”, but they were gradually eroded in the 19th century.  A 1922 Supreme Court decision (McKee v. Gratz) ruled that a “common understanding” about public rights to hunt, fish, or walk in unenclosed land is immediately revoked when a landowner posts a “No Trespassing” sign.

In my research on long distance walking in Ireland I have learned that Ireland and the USA have similar laws in relation to “right to roam”, and that these complicate the development of long distance walking trails in both nations.  This is less of a problem in USA because some 28% of land (mostly in less populated states) is publicly owned. Ireland set up a system of landowner compensation, “Walks Scheme” on 39 of its Waymarked Ways, which seems to work well.  But funding for extension of the scheme to additional trails was suspended during the recession.

Ilguna’s opinion piece is well worth reading.